YOU are the FB czar. You have control of all bowl and TV contracts, and can change conference affialiations and promote or demote teams for 1A or 1AA. If you wish, you can even break Div 1 into 3 or more subdivisions (ie 1A, 1AA, 1AAA or A, B, C etc).

The competition is for 1. The "most out of the box" idea. PLEASE not crazy to to be crazy, but constructivly crazy.
2. The idea you would most like to be adopted.
3. Idea with most chance of success.

Voting is by posting. You may vote for any idea but yours. You may vote once for every idea you post!! You may post several ideas at once by numbering them. Ideas must be posted 1st, but do not have to be posted seperately. Borrowing ideas from other threads is ok, but due credit is appriciated for the last to catagories. Not for the 1st! ;)

... will be accepted as “football-only” members of a BCS conference for a four-year term if they:
1) Average 30,000 per game in attendance over a three-year period,
2) Win their conference title two out of three years AND
3) Maintain an average final ranking in the Top 25 over three seasons.

Under these criteria, two teams could be promoted this season:

* Marshall (if they average more than 30K/game)

/me TCU (if they win CUSA title, are ranked in the Top 25 of both major polls and average more than 30K/game).

“Promoted” schools will be returned to their previous football conference if, over a four-year span, they:
1) Win less than 40 percent of conference games OR
2) Fall below 30,000 in per-game attendance AND
3) Do not win the conference title.

Schools will be dropped to Division I-AA if they fail to maintain attendance of 15,000 per game over a three-year span (see above).

Division I-AA schools with attendance over 15,000 per game in three consecutive years will be considered for promotion to Division I-A:

Under this criterion, right now:
Citadel
Delaware
Florida A&M
Montana
Youngstown State

could apply for promotion to Non-BCS I-A

Last edited by michaelr on Wed Sep 10, 2003 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

1. My "wild" idea. Three divisions. 1A, 1B, 1C. 11 game season. No Div I school could run a deficit.
1A (aka big time schools)would have all the 2005 rules plus a minimum attendance of 30k, 9 games against 1A schools, 4 home against 1A schools. FB schlorships 24/100 must give 85% of allowable (i.e. exception is for probation).
1B (aka mid-majors) current rules. 10k attendance. 22/72 must give 85% of allowable.
1C (current 1AA) Same as current 1AA.

Each division can decide its own method of crowning a champion.

2. The idea I would like to see. Booster clubs and businesses can fund schlorships. Thesame rule would apply as now, but these schlorships would NOT count toward Title IX! Yhis would probably take Congressional approval, but it would solve a LOT of problems. Obviously, schlorships to non-revenue sports would also not count, but FB is where the number and $ put so many schools in a crunch.

3. Probably pass? I don't have one yet. Let's see what else is posted.

First of all i put a moratorium on div 1a . no new schools unless ssome drop down to 1aa.
second , i take two games away from each school scheduler and let the ncaa schedule those two games to create some fairness. i would schedule some games that would create some excitement and tv interest. this would be more fair for all schools involved. my favorite example is kansas state. look at their schedule this year , it has no road non conference games. i would schedule an away game for them against some very tough competition. how about k state vs miami in florida. you know they would never want. that game . but i would schedule it. another reason i would do this is to help out some struggling programs that want to do better and improve. some examples of this type of scheduling would be games like west virginia vs marshall, auburn or alabama at uab, or possibly florida state vs south florida.
third i would create a playoff. all conferences must expand to 12.
these conferences would be the big ten, the big east, the pac ten, the mwc, the the new southern conferenceand the acc. they would have no choice on which schools they would get because i would assign them.
big ten gets memphis
big east gets louisville, cincinnati, notre dame, temple, maryland, and marshall
acc loses maryland, gets south florida and east carolina
pac ten gets hawaii and san diego state
mwc loses san diego state gets fresno state,boise state,
new mexico state, utep, and utah state
new great midsouth conference forms with 12 teams
rice, houston, smu, tcu, north texas, tulsa, la tech, southern miss, tulane, uab, central florida, and arkansas state
that leaves us with 8 conferences
big east, big ten ,acc, mwc,pac10 , sec, great midsouth,
big 12. each conference has a championship game to get a team in the playoff. they seed the schools 1-8 based on rankings and schedule strength. let the playoff begin.

Last edited by arpmany on Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Best comments here are those dealing with the rules; The realignment stuff is essentially another matter. But some of the rules may be unnecessary depending on the others adopted. FI, I would be for waiving the attendance requirement if programs were run with certain financial prudence and schools were required to play 5 1-A road games. To me that last fact is college football's answer to the salary cap as a means for spreading the wealth and keeping the larger schools tight. Frankly, if SEC and Big 10 schools can't survive on just 6 home games in 11 game seasons, well then they're paying somebody way too much. This could be dropped to 9 1-A road games within 2 seasons to allow more big-home-and-home match-ups.

As for the 1-A requirements, I imagine the financial requirements would clear out more of the bottom feeders than any attendance requirement, and be more fair.

My BCS nod, tier it all you want and assign match-ups via some ranking system, but all conference champions must be represented. With the other rules in place to encourage a smaller, more competitive 1-A level, it's safe to say an undefeated Tulane in this scenario would get its due notice.

I'd also move to curb movement to different divisions. I'd rather see the calibre of 1-AA improve as a whole than have this constant shuffle of schools ranked 100-117. Perhaps a study to help everyone find a permanent home and then carrots and sticks to help them stay there. If I think of the particulars I'll let you know.

My plan does allow for some movement among three tiers of football: Division I-A BCS, Division I-A Non-BCS and Division I-AA. In my view, some movement is healthy and should be managed intelligently by the NCAA and the conferences.

In my plan, the seven BCS conferences include at least one representative from every state where Division I-A football is played (that's smart politically), and every school that averages more than 30,000 per game in attendance.

Moreover, the type of plan I outlined would allow the Marshalls, Tulanes and TCUs of the world a chance, if they dominate their mid-major conferences and attract support for their programs, eventually to compete for championships on an equal term with the BCS schools.

It also demands that schools at the I-A level maintain a modicum of fan support so that the programs will not run deficits. I-A football makes sense if the program generates revenue for the athletic department. There is no good reason for a school to be losing money on I-A football. Such programs should be scaled down.

The idea for three 1A divisions is beginning to look less like a neat but politically impossible solution, and more like a messy political compromise. Currently, there is a large number of schools whose athletic budgets are in the red. Some women's lib groups are calling for a reduction in the number of FB scholarships, presumably, in order to fund more women's programs. This is called muzzling the ox that feeds you. I believe these are the current facts.

Consider this scenario. The football haves (mostly BCS) try to pass a rule that schools MUST balance their budgets. The have nots try to LOWER the number of scholarships to FB and non-revenue sports. The messy compromise would require schools to balance their budgets, but would let the conferences set the scholarship limits. Add some legislation for teams wanting to change conferences and let it set for 10 years.

This is my best guess of what you would have. The SBC and WAC would look like 1AA+. C-USA and the MWC would look like 1A-. The SEC would lead the way to 100 FB scholarships with the motto "because we can!". (This would be considered good reasoning in the SEC. ;) ) It would be a small step from there to a multi tiered format.

This is highly unlikely, but it should shed some light on what is happening, and hopefully on what will happen. The have's may be waiting for the invisible hand of ecomonics to do the weeding out of 1A for them. A few signs of a backlash from the have nots may already be seen.

i agree with gunnerfan about spreading the wealth as being the answer. if some of the big schools wont just help out some of the smaller schools, some of their scheduling should be taken from them . they should be forced to play some of the schools they refuse to play. i know alot of the schools would have a problem with it but if everyone is healthy the whole sport is healthy. i would like to create more regional interconference rivalries. some of them would be:
1. each year UAB gets to play ALABAMA or AUBURN in birmingham. their stadium would be filled to capacity and it would do some great help for the UAB program.
ALABAMA keeps complaining that UAB is not making money but i do not see them playing them to help them out.
2. WEST VIRGINIA vs MARSHALL. this game would be a brawl and an attendance getter for both schools.
3. SU vs BUFFALO
4. FRESNO STATE VS UCLA/ USC/ STANFORD/ CALIFORNIA . they have plans to build a 60000 seat stadium . playing these schools at home would probably pack the place.
5. COLORADO VS AIR FORCE
6. LSU VS LA TECH IN SHREVEPORT. this game should happen every other year in a home and home series.
7 . UNLV VS ARIZONA OR ASU
8. SOUTH FLORIDA AND UCF get a home game each year against either FLORIDA STATE, FLORIDA , OR MIAMI.
9. ILLINOIS VS NORTHERN ILLINOIS
10. PENN STATE VS TEMPLE
11. OHIO STATE VS CINCINNATI
all these games would be home and home series and would be like bowl games for the up and coming schools because they would probably fill their stadiums and get a very good payout. it would also give these schools a chance to earn some respect. i think the alabama and florida situations would really benefit all schools involved. one area i also forgot was texas . there are so many 1a schools there that dont play all the schools could benefit from a visit from texas, texas a&m, texas tech, baylor , or even tcu. for example ,TCU,SMU, and NORTH TEXAS are all located in close proximity to each other. playing each other saves on travel expenses and could help with attendance figures.

MichaelR: I like your ideas about movement up and down. Maybe with a little tweeking, it can be made to work. Of course, getting it PASSED is a different matter! ;)

Gunnerfan and Arpmany: I agree with you that rule changes are more important than realignment. I understand your desire to spread the wealth, but what is to prevent 1AA State from going 1A and then demanding a home game from Big Time U.? Also note Joedadi's keen observation about the number of top 40 teams in each conference. The Big 12 and the SEC have 3/8's of the top 40 teams, and the Pac 10 and Big 10 have another 25% . Should winning the WAC to equal to winning the Big 12? Your ideas Would help in this regard.

FBFAN i agree. there should be a moratorium put on 1a football. no new schools should be allowed in unless some schools leave. lets say u buffalo and louisiana- monroe dropped back down to 1aa.. then and only then should there be positions open for upgrades. it has gotten to the point where there are some schools that are making the whole 1a division look bad. they need to get all the schools healthy before letting more schools dilute it more. a good example is major league baseball. they have gotten to big and now look what has happened. they have contemplated getting rid of 2 teams . that same condition i think exists now in cfb.

FBFAN i agree. there should be a moratorium put on 1a football. no new schools should be allowed in unless some schools leave. lets say u buffalo and louisiana- monroe dropped back down to 1aa.. then and only then should there be positions open for upgrades. it has gotten to the point where there are some schools that are making the whole 1a division look bad. they need to get all the schools healthy before letting more schools dilute it more. a good example is major league baseball. they have gotten to big and now look what has happened. they have contemplated getting rid of 2 teams . that same condition i think exists now in cfb.

There are schools that also would make 1-A look good. Montana is one.

_________________The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

If I had a real vote, I would vote for the 20k rule, with or without grandfathering. I would also vote for balancing the AD budgets in 1A. On 5 away games, I am not for it, but I would compromise on it. I would vote for it if that would lead to passing the 1st two or preventing #4. I would vote for #5, but would NOT expect it to pass.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum